Intel Xeon's were designed to work as pair as far as i know. I'm building a system with dual nVidia 6800 Ultra gfx cards with sli technology and i was wondering if i had to buy to Xeon's because I know that Amd64 work fine with just one cpu
It all depends on what sort of applications you're going to be running. Dual CPU in games makes very little to no difference at all, unless of course it's running the server Personally i'd settle for something like an FX55 over Dual Xeons, if you choose otherwise you may be waiting quite a while for Dual Xeons motherboards with SLi to be manufactured
Well i actually dont want dual xeons i just wanted to make sure that it was possible to run a machine with just one as these cpus are marketed as being designed for multiple cpu systems.
Yes its possible to use a single one of these processors. However, I would use an Opteron and use Nvidia Nforce Professional if this is a graphics station for something other than 3D Studio Max.
This system will be primarily used with professional photo and video software as well use such 3d programs as 3dsmax and bryce, but it will be also used as a gaming and home theatre pc more primarily so i dont think i need the prossesional sets from nvidia and the the xeon 3.4 im thinking of getting it seems will give me more perdormance power than the amd opteron
If this system is mainly for gaming and other media options, I recommend getting the AMD FX-55. As of now, the AMD64 line whoops the Intel P4 line, and will give you better performance than Intel. Also, I wouldn't go Xeon or Opteron unless this is strictly a serious professional setup, or a server setup. Tis rediculous to use a Xeon or an Opteron for gaming, imho...
Well the only reason i was considering xeon was because of it price which is more than 50% less than the fx-55 but can you tell me why the xeon would be ridiculous for gaming... I have even seen some companys use xeons to power their "gaming rigs". Im still learing about the pros and cons of all these processors
...? 50% less? Checking the prices, a comparable Xeon would be $200 more than the FX-55, but I could be comparing the wrong things. Anyway. The Xeon processor is designed and specialized for handing massive, clock-intensive applications. The FX-55 is designed and specialized to perform all around, and has been proven to game much better than Intel processors. Also, is there a reason you are going completely high-end CPU? For a decent amount of rendering and such, but mostly gaming and media, you'll probably be just fine with an AMD64 3500+ .
I would go for a fx-55 or similar over dual xeons. It may even be wise to get a decent s939 system and upgrade to dual core inthe summer. Save money by going for a 3500 or similar rather than spending big bucks now of a fx-55. Unless im mistaken there were sli boards available for Xeons before AMD
And you want dual Xeon's? Listen to what most of us are saying: the FX-55 will completely waste the Xeon's in a standard environment. Also, why do you want such a high-spec computer? Are you sure you wouldn't be fine with an AMD64 3500+? Seems it would do everything you've stated you want to do...
well i didnt want dual xeons i just liked the xeons price compared to the fx55 but i didnt know that the amd would far surpass a zeon in a standard environment ... thats what i was trying to figure.. then perhaps the fx 53 would be a more suitable mix of price and performance for me
The FX-53 would, I'm sure, also work. Again though, are you sure you need that bleeding-edge of performance? I mean if you have the cash, it's worth it if not just for futureproofing, but I would figure a 3500+, or even a 3800+ would work.
well the reason why i want something so bleedin edge is for a couple reasons, One i want to futureproof it because itll prob be a year/ a year and half before i make another upgrade and two because i gotta admit its cool to be ahead of the game in terms of specs in comparison to your buddies
Children, calm down. The 3.4 GHz Xeon has the Nocona croe (very powerful, similar architecture to the northwood), which makes it very good for the stuff that he's after. Also, the 3.4 is a 64-bit processor, it just needs a chipset to support it. And please, let's not make this into yet another flame war, I'm getting very sick of these. He's obviously very adament about using a xeon setup, so try not to change his mind and respect his decision.
Adamant adj: Impervious to pleas, appeals, or reason; stubbornly unyielding. That sounds about right.
I'm not trying to change anyone's decision here - just confiming my own undestanding , but from what I read the Pentium Extreme editions were effectively based on Xeon chips (i.e. they had an increased L3 Cache of which few applications took note) and their value performance cost was not particulary good. Is there an advantage in going Xeon over and Extreme edition pentium?
I have been working with dual xeon setups for about 2 years now and let me tell you the performance difference between a single p4 and dual xeons is very impressive. I use a program called flowtherm to simulate airflow and heattransfer through our computer chassis It is extremely processor intensive typically when we run a simulation we let it run after we go home because they take so long to run(4-6 hrs). I cant imagine doing that w/ some fx-55. It sounds like you are doing some serious rendering with your machine especially with 3dstudio max and a SLi setup. This is typically where intel xeons shine over everything else on the market right now. If i was building a machine to do the things you want it to i would pick the xeon setup. Just make sure you buy a terminator,a ridiculous powersupply and some very nice heatsink as the noconas do run very hot. just my two cents
